The Meaning of a metaphor
iView Author: LAVANYA KRISHNAN (Irvine,USA)
Email: With held
The Meaning of a metaphor
Disclaimer: This may not be structured like a conventional review and is more a summary of the chain of thoughts sparked by the film than a description of the film itself. And inspite of what Hansal Mehta says, I have to take it seriously.
Delhi-6 sparked a whole range of reactions from me- as varied as the reviews that the film has been getting. I tried to go and see this movie with low expectations so that, as Calvin (of Calvin and Hobbes) very smartly puts it, my expectations are exceeded. But the first frame of the movie in red and black just did not allow me to do it. The initial frames (which I later realized were part of the Ram Leela performance) fairly exuded Rakeysh Mehra’s love for this medium and his passion for exploring and stretching its language.The stage within a stage and nested performances. So my expectations rose.
During the first half of the movie- I was unsure of what he was trying to do. I did not like Abhishek Bacchan’s narration and his verbal reactions to what was happening around, as they were self evident. I felt like I was not really getting a feel of Chandni Chowk and as if this was NOT Chandni Chowk but a film set (which was probably true). Added to that, the character of Rishi Kapoor (Ali Baig) struck me as very unreal and inauthentic. He was probably the weakest part of the movie. I was surprised, because I thought I’d find Abhishek Bachhan to be the weakest part of the movie. Now let me make it clear- I really like Abhishek Bacchan, have always liked him from the minute I saw him in the trailers of Refugee.As a teenager, while girls around me were drooling over Hrithik Roshan, I had a tiny crush on Abhishek Bachhan. There is an honesty and innocence about him (even now) which very few actors possess. Having said that, when I saw Guru, my patience snapped at the lack of attention to detail that was so evident in the way Abhishek played Guru. But I digress. What I am trying to say is that though I like Abhishek Bacchan better than any of the current batch of ‘conventional heros’, I have stopped expecting a worthy performance form him in any film. But , in this film, Abhishek actually worrrks. Inspite of his accent (or the lack thereof). He plays an American Born Confused Desi, Roshan. And though his character is an exception rather the rule, he is very believable. At first I thought, the director, overwhelmed by his love for the Chandni Chowk area, was unable to gain enough distance from it to capture it effectively. Then, I wondered whether the jostled way in which the first half was progressing, was not itself a metaphor for how the protaganist was feeling- overwhelmed and confused and not actually being able to comfortably sink into and integrate into the atmosphere. Just like me, the audience. However, I was still not sure whether Rakeysh Mehra achieved this effect because of lack of skill or because of too much of it. Whether it was because he was accidentally ‘off’ or very deliberately so. At the end of the movie it was more evident that it was the latter rather than the former.
The second half of the movie, found the surfacing of beautifully constructed metaphors that had already found life in the first half.. Kala Bandhar. The Fakir with the mirror. The parallel Ram Leela performance. The painting scene in the dream song. I have to mention this particular scene in the song which gave me goosebumps. A painter is painting what is in front of him. And just for an instant the distinction between the surrounding and the painting blurs and you are left wondering if the painter is painting what he sees or if we are seeing what he paints. I slowly felt myself sinking into the film.. And then, not as slowly, I started to feel like tearing my hair when the metaphors started being explained. Why does he have to explain everything, I moaned. In retrospect, I realize that there are two threads holding this film. One is its figurative language and the other is the theme/message. In most films that even attempt to introduce an echo of an metaphor, the metaphor is hardly central to the film. And that is where this film is different. In that, the metaphor is what this film stands on. The message and the metaphor share a symbiotic relationship- one can’t exist without the other. And it is very important for the metaphors to be understood, in order for the message to even exist. And this symbiotic relationship is also reflected in the relationship between the Hindu-Muslim community of the people in Delhi-6. Strong, yet tenuous and painted in shades of saffron, green and…grey. Mamdu, my favorite potrayal (maybe after Om Puri’s Madan) embodies the nuances of this deceptively simple relationship that is so precariously balanced.
But there is more.
After a much heated discussion with my husband I realized that the need to explain his metaphors either through the protaganist, his narrative or with the help of Gobar in the end, arises not just from him wanting to convey THE MESSAGE. It also arises from the desparate desire to improve the language of cinema- NOT of the so-called ‘multiplex crowd’ but of the average cine-goer. The ability to ‘get’ a metaphor is not at a all a reflection of intelligence. And so by explaining the meaning of his metaphors he is not undermining the audience’s intelligence but rather giving them exposure to how metaphor can be (so skillfully) incorporated into the medium of cinema.
Now, of course I had a problem with the explanations. Yes, it definitely dumped down the movie for me. But that cannot take away from Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra’s poetic sensibilities and their beautiful translation to this broad canvas that is a Hindi Film.
Tags: A.R.Rahman, Atul Kulkarni, Delhi 6, Divya Dutta, Om Puri, Rakesh Om Prakash Mehra, Sonam Kapoor
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
a very nice write-up. i can only say tat metaphors have to be explained lest the movie be misunderstood or not understood at all. wat the director needs to decide is how much explanation should go in there; it should not end-up becoming a spoon-feeding exercise, a few things shud be left to the viewers to decipher.
subtlety did not work for luck,bychance at all. tats where directors/screen-writers start explaining metaphors
Success of Delhi 6 is its message
The only thing which upset me after watching Delhi 6 was the fact that most of the film’s reviews I had read/heard were in poor taste. Post-Rang De Basanti, people certainly have huge expectations from Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra. I don’t know what others were looking for, but I expected a social message and he didn’t disappoint me at this. If Mehra couldn’t win over the mass he was targeting (I wonder if he really cared for the critics) with his conscious effort to capture and rejuvenate the spirit of Delhi, it’s not his failure but ours. People who don’t have heart in the right places cannot enjoy the daring sublime plot or appreciate his good intentions.
Mehra juxtaposes tales from the Hindu scriptures to appeal that mass which blindly follows the likes of Shiv Sena or BJP. Delhi 6 shows how the arrogance and absurd mythical history can create great rift between two communities. I salute Mehra for showing how the division takes places between Hindus and Muslims and how ridiculous basis of such divisions could be. I strongly believe the role of a filmmaker is also that of an educator. In a country where the politicians and people are both forcing the society into a new age of darkness, I strongly feel cinema can be a very effective medium to empower and enable the majority to fight this backward march.
I liked films of/around eighties that shaped a generation, glorified honesty and truth, shun crime and inspired the whole new generation when the Indian democracy was still in its infancy. But six decades down the line, we’ve forgotten the founding principles of the country. That’s why we needed Lagey Raho Munnabhai, and that’s why Welcome to Sajjanpur came, and for the same reasons, we have Delhi 6 — these filmmakers are not only entertaining the mass but also trying to introduce revolutionary ideas and reinforce the values of peace and brotherhood.
As for the where’s-the-plot-thing, I beg to differ. Let’s take Delhi 6 is a class in a college or a school, where the director is trying to teach his pupils about the value of unity and love and understanding and all that outdated ‘crap’ (if that is what you think it is). One can imagine how difficult it would be to keep them engaged and entertained with the same boring message of peaceful co-existence.
I forgive Mehra for using allegories and trying to be politically correct because those who have the power to call this a threat to Hindutva or communal peace and sabotage it at the Censor board might do the same or go on burning effigies and cinema theaters. If he were to pinpoint directly, talk about serious issues seriously, this movie wouldn’t have been less controversial and the film would have certainly denied the audience for whom the movie is meant for. I can see he’s been very cautious with the screenplay. But it’s without doubt that with his innovative style and rich cinematography, a terrific cast and good music, Delhi 6 has all the ingredients of a typical song-and-dance Bollywood movie.
Mehra creatively gets his message across without wanting to let the people feel they are actually being taught a lesson on religious tolerance and unity. “But people want fun.” Now is that so? We don’t like soft approach, do we? We want eye-for-an-eye, don’t we? Blood boils in the Indian heartland in all seasons; Delhi’s rude and rogue attitude is hardly ignorable. But Delhiwallas aren’t actually bad; they are good in their hearts! (That could be true for any city but I am not sure.) I’m glad that Mehra found the courage to make a movie that ‘teaches’ (many surely wouldn’t t like the use of this word here) the value of restraint and soft but sound judgment and that’s what makes Delhi 6 another significant movie to come out this year. After Mumbai terror attack, we were desperately in need of such a lesson. Never mind the fuss, Delhi 6 is a must.
Interesting take on the film. A box office film always explains metaphors. Message has to reach all and sundry. Leave nothing to chance, or intelligent interpretation. Yet to watch this film.
I have not seen the movie, but I beg to differ.
Movie if taken only as an art form, does not have to explain what it displays. As long as it can portray things without emotional or logical loopholes, it can enjoy the liberty of unexplained metaphors. Compare a film with a painting, or a melody or a composition – Da Vinci never bothered to explain what Monalisa’s smile was all about (or even if that was a smile or something else). Mozart never explained his fugues and we still discuss it in GEB – an eternal golden braid. They were left to us to define, decipher, make legends of and remember for years.
Films on other hand have a huge financial aspect. Hence we expect that as an average cine-goer, we’d be explained all the metaphors and hidden contents. In a way, the average cine-goer expects to be spoon-fed, and there is often nothing wrong in it. So our eternal conundrum is – whether to consider films as a pure art form or a commercial product. If it is former, the creators are the sole owners of it. They can make a movie as they want and not expect any immediate financial returns. If it is the latter, then the audience’s instant gratification becomes the director’s responsibility.
@crazyrals Thank you! and yes, I agree..But the nice thing about this film is that though the explanations might be overt, the metaphors themselves were drawn quite beautifully..So, if one removes the voice over, the film has only few minor flaws..
@salik Thank you for your thoughts! I agree with your take on the where’s the plot line..I think plot/structure is overrated in film..
@sudha: You *must* watch the film. Even though a lot is explained, this film is sufficiently layered and nuanced to be quite a satisfying watch..
Read this review for a more detailed plea to watch the film..:) http://radio-9a.blogspot.com/2009/02/delhi-6-review.html
Interesting and insightful write up. Well, we all know what happened to No Smkoing when AK chose not to explain it entirely…another film that comes to my mind is Anwar…
@Tejas: I actually agree with you about art . I think art should stand alone without the need to explain itself. This film escapes being art(in my opinion) for precisely that reason. I am not sure if Rakeysh Mehra deliberately chose to forgo the ‘tag’ of art in order to reach more people… or if he was only concerned about the financial returns. My first reaction was why didn’t he just let Spotboy produce it and not bother with the explanations..But then, mainstream cinema will probably never grow.
This film does have an honest ring to it- so I’d like to give him the benefit of doubt.
Watch the film- I’d love to know what you think of it.
@ Vikrant: Thanks! I know this is blasphemous- but I haven’t seen No Smoking..yet..Must.watch.soon.
Another beeeaauuuuutiful movie is Blue Umbrella. I LOVED it..
“The perception of truth comes from within, it cannot be a graft.”
@ Sameer… thanks that explains everything..